Michelle Malkin Dominates On The View

She left the three liberal harpies babbling …”but but but – wasn’t the Bush administration corrupt, too?”, and as Michelle would later quip, “You know you’ve won the argument when the ladies of the View are reduced to arguing how corrupt Team Obama is, and not whether”.

The Anchoress was “surprised at how tame the gals seem around Malkin”, and I would agree….no doubt they were well aware that they were encountering a determined firebrand who was in full command of the facts, (unlike themselves).

But at least they were willing to have her on to discuss the book.

Unlike the intellectually dishonest Bill Maher, who held the book up to ridicule and scorn, without actually confronting any of the points made within its 400+ pages:

Post navigation

61 thoughts on “Michelle Malkin Dominates On The View”

Uh, what corruption in the Bush administration was that airhead refering too? What a bunch of dopes. Pretty sad commentary that not only do these harpies have a show on TV, some actually take what they say seriously.

It was great to see the windbags on the view finally shut up and listen. Michelle gave them facts. Cant argue and opinion ate with facts. “Blame it on Bush”..Get off Katrina! The Local and State incompetents blew it bad before Bush got involved, by then New Orleans was already FUBAR!

Deb, you didn’t really expect Maher to produce an actual, logical argument against something he reflexively hates, did you? I’d bet the rent money he hasn’t done more than read the jacket copy of Malkin’s book.

Maher is as close to an intellectual vacuum as can be observed in human flesh. He’s a bundle of nerves and tics, nothing more. A Martian, observing you and Maher together, would conclude that Maher is a representative of a lesser species. To expect anything other than vacuous venality from him is taking the short end of a long bet.

Michelle really “kicked B (rear ends)” today on The View!! I have never seen anyone else (including Coulter) dominate the windbags like she did. She was awesome!! She left them speechless! It was the best “View” I have ever seen. I hope it gets on youtube so everyone will see how she outtalked, outsmarted, outwitted, the anti American dimwits on the show. I hope she gets on again!

rt you got it right… she was hyped up on meds before she even sat down… try to stop an insane female on those type of meds… did she even stop to breathe her madness? even elisabeth had to stop and laugh at this clown at the table… you go girls at the View! handle your business like the ladies we know you are! ha to all the haters… Michelle will be a memory

Janelle, we’ll wait to hear when you’re no longer employed just how wonderful you feel about that loud mouth female invited to the table this morning spewing all that hate against the “O” team. I really respected the ladies today, they allowed a crazy chick to sit and try to top that other crazy coulter chick… you go the View crew, you showed the rest of us you can take a joke and boy what a joke this Malkin girl is! check out her websites…. racist to the heart!

Hey DS, are you related to rt? You two have the same argument style, all bluster about how coo coo crazee insane Michelle is, but no facts. None. Zip zero nada. Michelle came to the table equipped with them. That’s why she owned the ladies on the View. And that’s why your arguments fall flat…(because you got nuthin’).

I watched The View this morning. Michelle is clearly trying to sell her book and like “Crazy Colter” forgets what she has said in other interviews. Maybe both have validity to their facts, but anyone can “spin” anything to whichever side they are on. Conservatives should try listening, god knows we had 8 years of doing things one way. No pafty is less or more corrupt than the other. It happens, it is the intergrity of a person, not the party. Get over it!

“Harpies”? “Windbags”? Wow – you really are pieces of work aren’t you – cutting edge of civilised discourse. Your blog is a perfect example of everything that is wrong with conservative politics over the last decade. You don’t bother to engage with actual discussion of legislative issues, you attack (or block) everybody that disagrees with you. Granted – there are many on the left who similarly do not understand how to argue – name calling is the norm on the internet! There has to be more to argument than simply standing in the way of change and believing that everybody is an idiot or corrupt. Empty rantings about non-existent socialism against a party that is actually centrist (the Dems – you’ve never had a left party) simply don’t cut it. Nor do nutty/racist conspiracy theories about the birthplace or agenda of your current president. For instance, I am amazed at the moronic support of extremely wealthy healthcare companies by many people who need decent care and are not getting it. Their arguments? – talking points given to them by the very healthcare companies who are screwing them. Lies fed by the same liars who were uncovered in the nineties. If you have a problem – propose a better solution. Personally I’m not holding my breath for any evidence of rational discussion here.

“…dishwashers, cooks and other suspect Hillary campaign contributors in New York’s Chinatown, Flushing, the Bronx, and Brooklyn who were limited-income, limited-English-proficient and smellier than stinky tofu.”

Also her links to VDARE.com (white supremacists) for whom she writes. What do they believe? The following pornographic nonsense: “Rushton lectured at length about the sexual differences among various races, arguing that blacks, while possessing smaller brains, reproduce at a faster rate due to the larger size of their sex organs. ‘Not to reinforce stereotypes,’ he has said elsewhere, ‘but it’s a trade-off: more brain or more penis, you can’t have everything.’ … He has also stated that Nazi Germany’s military prowess was due in part to the purity of their gene pool.” She employs one of the pondscum who works there as her principal writer on immigration. Malkin not a racist – pull the other one!

Empty rantings about non-existent socialism against a party that is actually centrist (the Dems – you’ve never had a left party)

That’s a common and nonsensical argument that I’ve seen Eric Alterman make. It obviously depends on where you define “center,” and in this country, “center” is between Keynesian capitalism and free market capitalism. That puts a public option health care plan on the left.

I am amazed at the moronic support of extremely wealthy healthcare companies by many people who need decent care and are not getting it.

Why do you use “extremely wealthy” as a pejorative? And “health insurance” does not equal “healthcare” (sic). Most of us support the current health care system because we are getting decent care. Duh.

Personally I’m not holding my breath for any evidence of rational discussion here.

Good thinking, because you’re not going to get the time of day here unless you learn how to use your inside voice.

Malkin’s racism? Here you go:

Pretty obvious from the context that “smellier than stinky tofu” referred to the legality of their contributions, not their race.

Also her links to VDARE.com (white supremacists) for whom she writes.

Hey, guess what? She doesn’t write for them. The articles are written for Creators Syndicate, who licenses them to VDare. She’s not even listed on the “Editors” page. To my knowledge, she doesn’t employ anybody there.

Hey c’mon guys – racism isn’t colour blind – or bound to any particular racial group. In the interests of trying to use civil discourse I’ll refrain from responding to Jackstraw’s jibes. I would suggest though that the very fact that she allows her articles to be published by a white supremacist site is questionable.

Incidentally, Geoff, your own comments are rather ‘uncivil’ – this how you deal with everyone you disagree with? My comment was aimed at statements made that seem to be the norm here and elsewhere (not just on the right). I’m just as bad, by the way, but it is becoming increasingly obvious to me that nothing can be gained by it. Don’tcha think?

Oh I think she could have a chat with the syndication company, don’t you? Jack, you are the last person who should lecture anyone about civil discourse, mate. Read your own stuff – plenty of invective and name calling there. If you want that, fine, but I just don’t see the point.

Yes, hypocrisy. And stupidity. I have an exceptionally low tolerance for stupidity. One of my many faults.

You’ll have to forgive me, Malky. After 8 years of listening to the left lie, slime, impugn, insult and basically make things up about anyone who disagreed with them my patience for loud mouth idiots like Joy Behar has been exhausted. I don’t have much more for people like you who spread lies and insults about others.

So if my discourse appears coarse to you, be thankful I respect Deb’s wishes to keep her site free of vulgarity. Unrestrained, I might really hurt your feelings.

Empty rantings about non-existent socialism against a party that is actually centrist (the Dems – you’ve never had a left party) simply don’t cut it.

There is nothing ‘centerist’ about coordinated policies of wealth redistribution, an established policy of lying to the American people whenever a camera and a microphone are present, and appointing a tax cheat to head the Treasury Department.

You don’t bother to engage with actual discussion of legislative issues, you attack (or block) everybody that disagrees with you.

Keep wagging that finger at me, and I will break it off and force feed it to you. By way of your nostrils. Too many in Congress and the federal government are convinced today that it is both wise and Constitutional to micromanage various elements of Americans’ lives today. They consider things to be “legislative issues” that are neither their business, or their legitimate and lawful concern, and when their dedicated talking points zombies such as yourself walk among the hoi poli and clumsily attempt to castigate those of us who know a manure merchant when we smell one, we will let you know that we aren’t buying what you are selling. The left, and yes Virginia, it does slink through the corridors of power, is not concerned with an honest dialogue, or civil discourse, as Professor Klavan so brilliantly informed us, and those of us who see and understand what is going on refused to be cowed by the finger waiving and hand-wringing of the self-appointed cognoscenti such as yourself. You can continue to spout your inanities, distortions, and lies, but don’t pretend to be shocked when you are treated with the same disrespect you demonstrate for our intellects when you show up here, and start spouting the nonsense wrapped in false concern and rhetorical condescension that you have displayed thus far. It only compounds the insult you already have paid us.

Incidentally, Geoff, your own comments are rather ‘uncivil’ – this how you deal with everyone you disagree with?

I was aiming for “rampantly uncivil” or “downright rude” rather than “rather uncivil.” My bad. That’s the way I deal with anybody who walks in and starts slamming the people here and spouting a bunch of lies.

Oh I think she could have a chat with the syndication company, don’t you?

Why? Only pinheads like you take the appearance of her articles there as somehow having something to do with other authors’ works.

And it’s nice to see you gloss over your initial lie (Malkin writes for VDARE) and try to move the goalposts (she should talk to Creators Syndicate). That’s how we know for sure that you’re a lib.

Geoff – I’ve said before, I’m not a lib, I’m a democratic socialist and proud of it. Malkin’s articles are syndicated and published on white supremacist sites, she has written a book extolling the virtue of interning Japanese Americans during the second world war (one that has been roundly criticized by reputable historians). Apparently it’s okay for her to use the word racist (actually racial opportunist) but not anyone else. Bollocks to that! Pinhead? You’ve been ingesting too much O’Reilly, feller.

Jackstraw – well, who cares what you think, since you don’t.

Black/white gangster type – I’m shaking in my boots!!! Meanwhile keep insulting and lecturing those of us that don’t agree with you, won’t you. Just don’t make pointless threats that you wouldn’t be able to carry out anyway.

Goodie. Someday, with diligent effort and the charity of society, you may be cured. There’s always hope.

Malkin’s articles are syndicated and published on white supremacist sites

We know. We’re the ones who explained it to you, remember? And now you’re persisting in trying to move the goalposts. You’re certainly as honest as a democratic socialist.

And it’s not a “white supremacist site.” Not to mention there’s only one that’s even in question, as I recall. A little accuracy in your statements would go a long way toward helping us not regard you as a babbling idiot. Though realistically, that’s going to be a losing battle for you.

she has written a book extolling the virtue of interning Japanese Americans during the second world war

That’s an awfully poor characterization of her book. It’s like you have no idea what you’re talking about. Like maybe you’re just repeating what you’ve read.

Apparently it’s okay for her to use the word racist (actually racial opportunist) but not anyone else.

Apparently its okay for you to make things up again. Par for the course.

First you take Malkin out of context, accuse her of writing for a “white supremacist site,” make some vague association of her book with racism, and then make some foam-flecked claim about her authority to use the word “racist.” And that’s the summation of your entire set of arguments.

Are you beginning to get a hint as to why we think you’re just another dishonest liberal (hey, we call our democratic socialists “liberal” in this country. Idiot.) troll? No?

I’m shaking in my boots!!! Meanwhile keep insulting and lecturing those of us that don’t agree with you, won’t you. Just don’t make pointless threats that you wouldn’t be able to carry out anyway.

*yawn*

You know, you remind me of a little dog my neighbors had when I was growing up. It liked to think it was tough by following behind people and yapping at its heels, but would take three steps backward and crouch behind something while growling at you if you stopped and turned around.

If you’re going to come around and sling excrement, the very least you could do it try to do it in an interesting way. I know, creativity is not a leftist strong suit, but you should fire up the third brain cell and give it a try.

Actually, Geoff, you silly hillbilly, no I didn’t spread any untruths here about what Ms Malkin said – she did use the term ‘racial opportunist’ (code for ‘racist’) on Fox. And her book is obviously light weight.

As to that stuff re democratic socialist – well I guess we live in different countries – but I’m pretty damn sure that the one that governs my country would be considered much further left than the one the governs yours (if Americans were ever to experience it). In my terms the Dems continue to be a centrist/right wing party with one or two reasonable qualities (eg the effort to improve health care for all Americans) – as opposed to Republicans who from here look like they’ve completely lost their collective minds. Idiot? Which right wing media personality did you crib that expression from?

Geez, consigliere, I can’t be that uninteresting – you keep responding (either with threats or witless insults – neither of which are particularly creative).

no I didn’t spread any untruths here about what Ms Malkin said – she did use the term ‘racial opportunist’ (code for ‘racist’) on Fox. And her book is obviously light weight.

And once again you prove how dishonest you are. Did I ever say that you “spread any untruths here about what Ms Malkin said?” No, I said that you:
1) took her writing out of context,
2) accused her of writing for a white supremacist site,
3) claimed her book was racist, and
4) made up some nonsense about her sole authority to use the word “racist.”

So what are you going on about? You’re defending yourself against arguments I never made.

And her book is obviously light weight.

Completely irrelevant to your charge of racism. Not to mention that to you, her book is not “obviously” anything, since you have no idea what’s inside it.

Idiot? Which right wing media personality did you crib that expression from?

That doesn’t even make any sense. “Idiot” is not an “expression,” no right wing media personalities are known for saying it, it’s a common word, and it’s just one in a continuing series of epithets that you’re likely to enjoy.

But I can see why that would occur to you, since you’ve cribbed all of your lame arguments from lefties.

Geez, consigliere, I can’t be that uninteresting – you keep responding (either with threats or witless insults – neither of which are particularly creative).

By uninteresting, I mean predictable. Predictable leftie talking points, predictable style of argument (moving the goal posts, attacking strawmen, and pointing to something else when you can no longer defend the inanity you spouted). It requires a response to keep yapping little dogs like yourself from becoming confident that you are closing the sale on the faulty wares you are peddling.

I see our resident troll has stopped by again to drop off another steaming pile of stupid.

>>I’m a democratic socialist and proud of it.

Both statements are obvious based on your inane attempts at a rational argument. Democratic socialists, much like their liberal counterparts here in the US, can’t be bothered with simple things like facts, economics and personal responsibility. No, they answer to a much higher calling, social justice and the way they want things to be.

Worse, they don’t want to work for anything, they want others to provide for them while they simultaneously try to tell productive members of society why they are evil and need to be controlled. In your twisted world, it is our job to provide for those “less fortunate” and you want to set the rules of how we should do it. Not buying, chuckles.

>>Jackstraw – well, who cares what you think, since you don’t.

Is your irony meter broken? A left wing troll comes onto a conservative site and proceeds to lecture us in how to act and what to think and you think anybody gives a damn what you have to say? Good lord you are a moron.

Take a good hard look at what is happening in the US right now Malky. Not what you want to happen, what is happening. Obama is plummeting in the polls, he has a worse approval rating than Bush did at a similar time in his administration. Obama’s stimulus plan is cratering as anybody with a basic understanding of economics knew it would. Unemployment is skyrocketing. Our debt is piling up at a rate unprecedented in US history to a level that is unsustainable. Cap and Trade, designed to counter the myth of man made global warming is being exposed for the scam it always was and his healthcare plan is on life support. Race relations are sinking to levels we haven’t seen in years.

None of this is surprising. In fact, many of us “stupid” conservatives predicted all of this before the election while lefties were stuck on the stupid platform of social justice, empathy, economic redistribution and electing a wholly unknown and unqualified man strictly on the basis of his skin color and hopey changey rhetoric. In other words, your platform.

Your ideas, such as they are, have always failed and will always fail because they are based on wishes and hopes and not logic. It’s a shame that morons such as yourself are allowed to have any say in governing, the down side of democracy. But that doesn’t mean we can’t point at halfwits such as yourself and laugh.

Jackstraw, your rant is lying nonsense. Unemployment is skyrocketing because of years of bad Democrat/Republican governance, particularly in the economic sphere – no amount of cant eminating from conservative blogs like this is going to rebut that. Further, the fools who led you to where you are have put every western country at risk of going under. Since I live in a country where an economic stimulus plan has worked (so far) I think I am perfectly able to comment on this. Incidentally, what makes your “Greed is good” ideology so special? What precise economic theory are you an adherent of? There is no evidence of any understanding or argument regarding economic theory in any of your posts. Petulent insults are not good enough. Finally, your penultimate paragraph gives you away, sport – you and your ilk don’t enjoy being called racists, but that’s exactly what you are. Finally you admit it!

Unemployment is skyrocketing because of years of bad Democrat/Republican governance, particularly in the economic sphere

That, for once, is at least partly true. There are many other factors, like the administration terrifying business owners and Wall Street in the first quarter of the year, but this is the first thing you’ve said that was close to being right.

Further, the fools who led you to where you are have put every western country at risk of going under.

That’s more indicative of the existence of fools in “every western country,” than in the US.

Since I live in a country where an economic stimulus plan has worked (so far)

And now you start slipping off the rails again. The argument over the stimulus is not that a good package couldn’t work, but that the stimulus package as proposed was inefficient and too slow at creating jobs to provide much relief. And, of course, that it was a huge chunk of deficit spending that would have long-term effects on inflation and the budget.

There are approaches that work more quickly and efficiently, and these have been used successfully in the past. The adminstration’s package ignored those approaches and put together a social worker’s dream stimulus package.

Unfortunately, social workers don’t know anything about economics.

What precise economic theory are you an adherent of?

I think most of us are von Misians. I personally am more of a neo-von Misian (yeah, I made that term up), believing that government intervention is unavoidable under certain circumstances.

Finally, your penultimate paragraph gives you away, sport – you and your ilk don’t enjoy being called racists, but that’s exactly what you are.

Again with the nonsense, and inability to comprehend simple text. Jackstraw calls Obama’s voters racists, and then you say that proves he’s a racist. By your logic, that proves that you’re a racist, too.

>>Unemployment is skyrocketing because of years of bad Democrat/Republican governance, particularly in the economic sphere – no amount of cant eminating from conservative blogs like this is going to rebut that.

I see. So when Obama claims his plan has saved the economy he’s lying because according to you everything that is happening in this country was caused by previous administrations. Why are you calling Obama a liar? Is this your idea of economic analysis, a stimulus in your country is bringing your country back but it’s not in America because, what, we are still captives of our past? Do you have a news letter I could subscribe to?

>>Further, the fools who led you to where you are have put every western country at risk of going under.

So then you are willing to admit that Australia along with most of the western world rises and falls with the fortunes of America? You’re correct. And you’re welcome. Without the engine of America Australia would still be a barren penal colony.

>>Since I live in a country where an economic stimulus plan has worked (so far) I think I am perfectly able to comment on this

Who exactly said we didn’t need a stimulus? What we didn’t need was THIS stimulus specifically because it isn’t a stimulus. It was a plan crafted in Congress to reward Dem constituents. It is doing less than nothing and is adding billions more to our debt.

>>Incidentally, what makes your “Greed is good” ideology so special? What precise economic theory are you an adherent of? There is no evidence of any understanding or argument regarding economic theory in any of your posts.

I’m not sure why you think I need to prove anything at all to you but I’ll use this as a teachable moment. Here is what makes “Greed is good” so special spoken by the man who’s economic philosophy I share. It has served me and this country extremely well. You play the part of Phil Donahue.

>>Petulent insults are not good enough. Finally, your penultimate paragraph gives you away, sport – you and your ilk don’t enjoy being called racists, but that’s exactly what you are. Finally you admit it!

I thought you said you knew something about America? Obama and the liberals ran a campaign largely predicated on America redeeming herself by electing a black man. This was no secret but an overt ploy to capitalize on white guilt and energizing the African American base. It worked overwhelmingly with Obama getting over 97% of the black vote for example. Now that is racist.

In any case I would have thought you and your ilk would have learned your lesson from the Great Beer Summit. Crying racism over and over is not working for you clowns anymore. I judge people on the content of their character and not the color of their skin which is why I could support Condi Rice, Collin Powell before he turned into a squish and even Michael Steele when he’s not busy jamming a foot in his mouth and not Obama who is a far left radical who spent his early adult years at the foot of a black separatist and who is driving this country into the ground with absurd programs that are rapidly dividing this country.

You guys need a new playbook, we aren’t falling for that crap anymore. And yes, petulant insults are enough for you, troll.

I am always amused when a foreigner who knows nothing of the internal dynamics of this country and its politics shows up and starts lecturing us on being racists.

Jack Straw was commenting on the tendencies of the aging hippies toward self-loathing and an undeserved white guilt which drove many of them to vote for a man who, if not for the color of his skin and his rhetoric, which included the promise of a “post-racial America” (invoked to get votes on alternating days when he and his supporters were not busily playing the race card), would have been quickly dismissed as the inexperienced and shallow candidate that he really is. You speak of our country as having put every western country at risk, yet do not understand where the root of that truth resides. Our elected officals have willingly passed a “stimulous bill” that spends very little of its record expenditures this year, and when it does start spending on its “shovel-ready” jobs, it spends very little on permanent jobs, or jobs that have an real impact on the infrastructure. The unemployment rate is climbing as tax revenue is falling because Democrats persist in the belief that any one who actually pays taxes is “Rich”, and therefore deserves to pay the taxes which are then used to buy more votes from those who do not. Then they scratch their heads and wonder why this is so, when the people they target make cuts in the numbers of people they employ in order so that they can stay in business and take care of their own families, thus reducing their “taxable economic profile” and cutting the amount of taxes that they pay, which leads to the net effect of tax revenues being significantly reduced. Not really a mystery to a person who is part of the class being targeted by the Dumbacratic party, but an unexplained anomaly for the party that intends to use punative tax policies to fund Disneyland for Freeloaders.
I’m sure that you know this is all wrong and eeeevvvviiillll conservative propaganda, and you will feel secure in your lack of first hand knowledge on topic on which you hold forth, largely because you feel you’re right, and therefore you MUST be correct. That’s ok. We’ll keep on living the reality that you know is wrong, and you can keep on believing what you believe.

Not buying, guys. Your own statements are imbued with a certainty about politics and economics that you accuse me of. No white guilt here – just an acceptance that the past histories of my country and yours in relation to race are appalling (my country is just as bad as yours). This is not enough of an excuse to elect a member of a racial minority to government positions because of white middle class guilt – I agree. Unlike you, I think that Barack Obama is equal to the task. You don’t, and of course that’s fine. I happen to think that the basis of your hatred of Obama is racist, and that you have an unreasoning hatred of elected Democratic Party officials. You disagree with me and that’s fine – as you say it’s your blog. Finally, calling people ‘Dumbocrats’ or ‘Repugnicans’ is just dumb as far as I’m concerned, as is the very confused shrill noise (very prevalent here!) regarding Obama’s administration as both commie and fascist (that just gives away a complete lack of knowledge of what these ideologies are and how they arise).

Your own statements are imbued with a certainty about politics and economics that you accuse me of.

I don’t recall anybody talking about your certainties, but I pretty sure that’s way down the list of our objections.

an acceptance that the past histories of my country and yours in relation to race are appalling

Who cares about past history? We were happy to be part of the generations that changed race relations. At least we were until race became a political bludgeon for the Dems.

I happen to think that the basis of your hatred of Obama is racist, and that you have an unreasoning hatred of elected Democratic Party officials.

I don’t hate Obama – I’m appalled by him. I do hate Reid, Pelosi, Boxer, Feinstein, Murtha, Frank, and Kennedy (pick any). I’m amused in an I-can’t-believe-these-people-hold-office sort of way by Kucinich, Kerry, and Waters. I disapprove of most of the rest of the Democrats, though a few aren’t too bad. But I’m not alone in despising GOP officials like Snowe, Collins, Graham, and formerly Specter.

Obama’s administration as both commie and fascist

We’ve been using the terms in their colloquial sense, because we’re not particularly concerned about offending commies or fascists. The facts that Obama:

o is trying to implement major new controls on industry, has meddled in the internal workings of companies,

o is devoted toward redistributing the wealth of individuals,

o is going to require all of us to carry health insurance,

o is going to require that that insurance conform to a central agency’s criteria,

You decided to come on here, as liberal trolls are want to do on conservative sites, and with no evidence save for that which you attempted to create accuse us of being racist and knee jerk reactionaries with little or no understanding of how economies and government operates. Ironically, your posts and our responses have shown the opposite to be true.

If you wish to go on believing in the face of overwhelming historical evidence that policies you support will work then have at it. That doesn’t mean any of us have to. If you want to believe that we are all racists because we don’t support what Obama is doing and despite evidence that we support conservatives of all colors and genders, you are welcome to that belief as well.

Let’s talk about health care reform and the lies that have been perpetrated and nurtured by Michelle Malkin.

Let’s be honest and add up the lies that have been perpetrated by the insurance industry and ultra-conservatives nuts like Malkin who want to see the administration fail, even if it means hurting their own family, not to mention the nation. Most of those lies have targeted our senior citizens and their deepest fears.

1. Death Panels: This is so absurd, it barely even warrants a response. The ‘end of life’ counseling item was added to the House bill by a Republican (Grassley) and it is something which has already existed in previous health care legislation. It simply means that any meetings between a family and a doctor concerning important decisions, such as hospice care, would be covered. The only “death panels” we have now are the ones owned and operated by the private, for-profit insurance companies, which decide who will be covered and for what. Use or imply the idea of euthanasia and seniors will definitely get grouchy.

2. You don’t get eye care till you go blind: A curious claim by opponents of health care reform, since neither bill being considered mentions blindness, macular degeneration, or sight. Since the vast majority of people who suffer from macular degeneration are elderly white women, this claim has been an effective scare tactic.

3. Socialized medicine: This is a rather stupid claim, given that the government wouldn’t be taking over anything and that no plan currently being considered would put any doctors, nurses, technicians or therapists on the government payroll. Genuine socialized medicine precludes any choices at all, and that is obviously not the case with either of the reform bills. What we have right now is a form of corporate socialism, where a handful of insurance company executives make decisions about who will be denied coverage and how high premiums will go. Of course, Malkin calls this “capitalism at its best.”

4. “I don’t want the government messin’ with my Medicare!” An amazing complaint, considering that Medicare is administered by the federal government, and that most seniors are quite happy with their coverage. Medicare is in financial trouble, not because of government mismanagement, but because of sky-rocketing medical costs. Unless those costs are brought under control, Medicare will go into the red, taxes will go up and the deficit will continue to explode. If you’re a genuine conservative, health care reform should be at the top of your “Things to Do” list. But Michelle Malkin wants it defeated because it would mean handing a political victory over to a black president.

5. Rationing of medical care for the elderly: There is no such provision in either of the bills currently being considered. In fact, Medicare would remain untouched. Of course, reducing health care costs across the board would ensure that Medicare will avoid bankruptcy. This is yet another scare tactic Malkin has fed into that has zero basis in fact.

6. The public option will drive people away from private insurers, and take away our choices. Only if private insurers refuse to reduce their operating costs and lower premiums. If they can’t compete with the public option, then they should go out of business. The whole notion that a profit motive should dictate the quality of health care in the United States is absurd anyway. There are plenty of other industries where making money is good for business and good for the country. But Michelle Malkin doesn’t realize that we’re talking about people’s lives here and the fact that millions of hard-working Americans are going bankrupt every year because they can’t afford decent medical coverage or any coverage at all because of a previous condition.

Malkin, like many critics of health care reform, are liars who are driven by anger that we have a black man sitting in the White House. The others are just misinformed people who know nothing about the actual bills and have bought into Malkin’s scare tactics. As many commentators are saying now, this debate is no longer about health care reform. It’s about President Obama. That’s why we have Michelle Malkin blogs and morons carrying assault weapons to presidential events.

The whole notion that a profit motive should dictate the quality of health care in the United States is absurd anyway.

First, everything is motivated by profit, personal or corporate. Second, insurance does not equal quality of health care. Third, you can substitute “government committee” for “profit motive” in that sentence and come up with a much more accurate statement.

A curious claim by opponents of health care reform, since neither bill being considered mentions blindness, macular degeneration, or sight.

This is a sterling example of why conservatives and liberals can’t find a common ground – liberals talk about the bill and conservatives talk about the downstream consequences. Certainly the eye care problem is real, and an excellent example of what happens when the government takes a direct interest in health care and cost control.

The dishonesty in the above statement is that while the bills don’t discuss macular degeneration explicitly, they certainly establish the committees who will discuss it and decide if the treatment is cost effective on a societal basis.

This is a rather stupid claim, given that the government wouldn’t be taking over anything and that no plan currently being considered would put any doctors, nurses, technicians or therapists on the government payroll.

Again, this is the Left talking about today, while conservatives are talking about tomorrow. Conservatives see the inevitable path: government, finding that it’s proposed cost control measures are useless, will then begin defining health care compensation rates. Nationalizing health care providers is then a much smaller step.

Rationing of medical care for the elderly: There is no such provision in either of the bills currently being considered.

The biggest lie by omission of all. The whole strategy for making the system affordable is to draft the young into the system and to provide guidelines for recommended treatments that will avoid “wasting” money on “pointless” care for the elderly. It is not explicitly stated in the bill, but the legislative mechanisms and cost pressures are established by the bill, and the President has clearly pointed to seniors’ health care costs as an area where expenditures can be cut.

Would you like to tell me what the unfunded liability of the “gov’t option”, Medicare, is today? Is this your idea of fair competition, when a gov’t agency is allowed to run up multi-trillion dollar deficits and just kick the fiscal can down the road? Do liberals have no shame or understanding of what they are talking about?

Your goal is to put even more people on “free, gov’t healthcare”, a system that is already a financial disaster and getting worse by the day while most of our population ignores the consequences we will all face from this fiscal fairy tale, that about sum it up? Why should anyone sentient being take anything you or your cohorts on the left say seriously when none of you are ready to address the costs of your proposals in an honest way?